Streaming is overrated..:)
At home, it's a bit different. Streaming services like Netflix and
YouTube are pretty good, especially on an unlimited 100/40 Mbps connection.
On 03-15-19 06:22, August Abolins wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
At home, it's a bit different. Streaming services like Netflix and
YouTube are pretty good, especially on an unlimited 100/40 Mbps connection.
:)
What privilege!
I only get 5/.6 Mbps with DSL (albiet unlimited), but only located at
my place of work.
Additionally, for use at home, I get 2/.8 with Rogers mobile (3G Stick)
as I attempt to keep my usage quota under 5GB/month to avoid paying overage.
With today's tracking and overly graphic elements on websites,
screenloads can feel like dialup.
.. A few days ago people remembered 30 years of WWW. Nobody
ever remembered 30 years of Fido, it was relevant at one time.
Www embraced commercial presence. Fidonet was always promoted as "hobby" non-commercial. Hence, Www gets corporate funding, compuserve is created, comes along, subscriptions are offered, etc. That's why it is remembered. Fidonet is completely different, just a hobby network, privately supported nothing wrong with that except that is not what makes the evening news.
I learned about Fidonet through a BBS magazine. I believe one particular i I had even included RBBS-PC (or it was ordered by request, I can't remember But that's what got the ball rolling for me.
Fidonet for me in 1989/1990 was what HAM radio was to nerd teens growing up in the mid 80's. When I got a reply from someone 3,000 miles away, I was hooked.
I was a huge fan of Seadog, TBBS/Flame, etc but D'Bridge sold me in the end.
On 03-16-19 15:38, Paul Hayton wrote to Nick Andre <=-
Cool memories Nick :) I can only talk of the early to mid 90's but I
agree it was such a buzz to use the gear and set up something that
worked across continents :)
We shouldn't be comparing www and fidonet or get depressed about it and think there is no hope for a new improved fidonet.
Cool memories Nick :) I can only talk of the early to mid 90's but I
agree it was such a buzz to use the gear and set up something that
worked across continents :)
..YouTube can work, and I have a script that strips the AAC
audio off the video. Might have to resort to that.
Kbps tops? Most of the time 128 Kbps mp3's are fine in the car or
other noisy environments. But I find that 128 Kbps tunes converted to
There's an artist I like who recently released a new album. I would
have bought it except he put all the videos up at his Youtube channel. So I just downloaded them instead. While I'm pretty sure downloading is against YT's TOC, I think it's all legal.
Hmm, That would probably be considered equivalent to the practice of recording songs off the radio, which we all did in our youth - technically illegal, but everyone did it.
With 5D addressing, it *should* have been possible to have 1:1/2@fidonetentire > point of the domain portion of the address afterall). But 5D
and 1:1/2@fsxnet be two different systems with no conflict (that is the
(domain) support in FTN software is not ubiquitous, and frankly quite useless today. :-(
Rob Swindell : Dan Clough wrote:
With 5D addressing, it *should* have been possible to have 1:1/2@fidonet and 1:1/2@fsxnet be two different systems with no conflict (that is theentire > point of the domain portion of the address afterall). But 5D address
(domain) support in FTN software is not ubiquitous, and frankly quite useless today. :-(
Very interesting. Was this actually possible with the fidonet protocols?
Sorry, but I "stepped away" from fidonet-things after 2006.
On 03-16-19 23:09, August Abolins wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I always wondered.. isn't all the audio at YT restricted/limited to 128 Kbps tops? Most of the time 128 Kbps mp3's are fine in the car or
other noisy environments. But I find that 128 Kbps tunes converted to audio CD sound terrible when I need a collection to play in my standard
hi fi CD player. Ever hear of the term "listening fatigue" when CDs
first came out? That's the same thing I experience (plus of other noticeable differences) when I play CDs created with 128Kbps originals.
There's a kind of "edgyness" in the sound that gets more and more annoying and uncomfortable.
On 03-17-19 02:44, August Abolins wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
If I recall correctly, the practice of recording from radio was ruled perfectly fine, for personal use. To recognize the matter, a tarrif
was placed on blank tapes and CDs.
This site has some historical info and prices about that:
http://www.cpcc.ca/en/the-cpcc/private-copying-tariff
On 03-17-19 03:02, August Abolins wrote to Rob Swindell <=-seless
t of the domain portion of the address afterall). But 5D
address
(domain) support in FTN software is not ubiquitous, and frankly quite
today. :-(
Very interesting. Was this actually possible with the fidonet
protocols?
Personally, I probably have tin ears; they've never had a problem with 128k .mp3 files, nor do I own any high end audio equipment. But that's just me.
You don't know what you are missing! It is such a pleasure to witness music on quality room-filling equipment. The ear-bud generation is
August Abolins wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
If I recall correctly, the practice of recording from radio was ruled perfectly fine, for personal use. To recognize the matter, a tarrif
was placed on blank tapes and CDs.
August Abolins wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I always wondered.. isn't all the audio at YT restricted/limited to 128 Kbps tops? Most of the time 128 Kbps mp3's are fine in the car or
other noisy environments. But I find that 128 Kbps tunes converted to audio CD sound terrible when I need a collection to play in my standard
hi fi CD player.
August Abolins wrote to nathanael culver <=-
You don't know what you are missing! It is such a pleasure to witness music on quality room-filling equipment. The ear-bud generation is
losing out on witnessing a great audio experience.
I have one album that I ripped from CD that was missing a track, and downloaded a replacement off of YT, and it stands out like a sore
thumb when listening to it.
..all the new music is being mixed with the levels boosted, to
sound better in our little earbuds. I've got a couple of albums where
I downloaded a replacement "remastered" album, then found the original version and compared the two. The sound is so much fuller on the older versions.
I think they refer to it as the "Loudness Wars" in a YouTube video I
watched.
Yes, but all the new music is being mixed with the levels boosted, to
Did you recreate the album on a new CD? If so, there is a feature most burners have to "normalize" the sound levels so all tunes are close to the same volume.
You don't know what you are missing! It is such a pleasure to witness music on quality room-filling equipment..
You don't understand. One of my first jobs out of grad school was selling home electronics, including high-end audiophile stuff. I really did have difficulty hearing the difference, and had to fake it for the customers. Maybe the tinitus has something to do with it.
Ah.. in a prior message you said you had a "tin ear". I took that as
| Sysop: | Zazz |
|---|---|
| Location: | Mesquite, Tx |
| Users: | 7 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 03:23:27 |
| Calls: | 157 |
| Files: | 2,103 |
| Messages: | 146,005 |